If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I guess this is a 2 part question and would like this to be a good and honest discussion as well.

1. When should a cache be archived?

2. Should complaints be validated before a cache is archived?

I think that complaints should not be a valid reason to archive anything. So haffy I dont like your Frenches Mountain cache. Does that mean it's outta here if I can come up with a good lie and sell it well.

This was just an example, I havent even done the Frenches Mountain cache.

Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.

Holy crap!!

Originally Posted by Trezurs*-R-*Fun

Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.

I guess this is a 2 part question and would like this to be a good and honest discussion as well.

1. When should a cache be archived?

2. Should complaints be validated before a cache is archived?

There is a relatively new cache in my area that I have a complaint about. I have made my issue with it known to both the owner, and the entire geocaching community(needs maintenance icon), and NOTHING has been done about it.

Is it a serious issue?....yes and no....could someone get hurt because of it? not likely....could some one get questioned by muggles or the muggle force due to the area it is in?....yes....very likely. Should the cache be archived?....no....it's an okay cache. The owner has done nothing to fix this cache. I have heard through the geo grapevine that he has no plans to fix it and that he was somewhat pleased because then, cachers would have to search longer. I believe several other finders had the same problem with this cache. I don't know. I feel my complaint has been "validated" since others have had the same complaint, but I don't think that should force an archive. I think it depends on the situation, and every situation is going to be different, and handled accordingly.

Thankfully, we have a great approver in GPSFUN who is willing to guide us and educate us on how things will work.

Part 1: a.)When a cache is no longer loggable due to lack of maintenence or simply missing and when the original cache owner can not be reached or the original hider has shown no intention of maintaining or replacing the cache.
B.) When the cache is in violation of gc.com's hiding guidelines. c.) When the owner wishes to discontinue the cache.

Part 2: Only complaints that can be validated are legitimate complaints. An anonomous complainer should not be considered valid as the true intention behind the complaint is unknown. While the anonomous complainer may site specific things, those things may be fabricated with malice intent. Anonomous complainers that quote greviences of other as a focus for action are usually done to promote their own interest in hope to convince others they are the benefactors for the agrieved. This tactic is used as diversionary in hopes to shift blame onto the supposed person with a complaint, in case the complaint is found unjust and unvalid, which usually happens.

Because unvalidated complaints are simply that; unvalidated, it would be hard to pass a judgement without talking to the actual parties involved, not the supposed benefactor (usually anonomous) of the agrieved party. As details progress by those investigating, it may be found that there was no complaint or even knowledge of any conflict by those people cited as having the complaint.

Responding to these complaints in a punitive or definitive manner without validating the complaint is not fair to the person or party that the complaint was made against. Any action in favor of the unvalidated complaint is like saying that an individual is guilty until proven innocent, instead of the other way around. To reiterate, were punishing someone for a crime they may or may not have commited simply because someone said you did it.

The short answer: No, caches should not be archived based on unfounded and unvalidated complaints. Maybe disabled until circumstances can be properly investigated but not archived. I'm sure there are special circumstances to stand against my arguments here but I'm not debating those here.

Goooooo Steve, That was awesome. I should have called you to handle my Divorce.

In the case of a property owner complaint, including private property, trespassing, complaints from the managers or stewards of land parcels and the like, we typically will archive the cache immediately and then look into ways the property owner's issues might be mitigated. There are a few exceptions, but this is the general practice.

If we are notified of a situation where a cache should not have been published, e.g., placement on a railroad right of way, we will either un-publish the cache page if there are no find logs or archive it if there are find logs.

In the case of a "needs archived" note placed on a cache page, I will generally add a reviewer note to the page asking the cache owner to let me know their intentions within ten days. If I encounter a cache that has been inactivated for more than a month, I may post a reviewer note with the same question. Reviewer notes placed on a cache page cause an e-mail to be sent to the cache owner; if there is no response, I will archive the cache page.

It is not our goal to archive as many caches as we can; actually we would like to keep as many caches in play as we can. If a cache falls into poor condition, our actions are intended to motivate the cache owner to bring it back up to par. If you do a search or a pocket query to plan a geocaching outing, we would like the result to be a list of caches that are not going to disappoint you.

Also keep in mind that cache pages that have been archived can be unarchived if the issues are mitigated successfully.

French's Mountain

Originally Posted by dave1976

I think that complaints should not be a valid reason to archive anything. So haffy I dont like your Frenches Mountain cache. Does that mean it's outta here if I can come up with a good lie and sell it well.

Well we did this cache yesterday and it was one of my favorite short hikes with a view. But I get the point.

Why not live life like it is your last day....instead of pretending to be a member of the Peter Pan Club and believing you will be around forever.

Complaints should always be considered. If the complaint is valid, it does not matter what the source is. However, if the compaint is from the land owner/manager, the cache needs to be disabled until their concerns are met. The land owner/manager has the final say, always.